[mecharmor23]

Basically I've been playing most of my games at full speed without any disturbance in frame rates. Except in FF9 where there are some slowdowns but VERY FEW. The Games I play are basically 2-3 years old maybe thats why. Some effects always slow down fps, D3D lighting in FF9 is an example. I know its cheap but I heard that there is a drawback. Is there a big difference between the GTS version and the regular mx version? Or are the improvements not noticible.

Then again I heard about Geforce3 having the problem of running games at lower resolution will slow things down on older games. Is this true?

 

[404]

Q. What different types of GeForce card are available and what are the differences between them?
The following list is with the cheapest and slowest cards first, and the most expensive and fastest cards last.

GeForce 256 SDR - Runs at 120mhz core / 166mhz memory.
GeForce 256 DDR - The same as a GeForce 256 SDR except it uses DDR memory.
GeForce2 MX - May be SDR or DDR, but they are both roughly the same speed because with the MX DDR memory has to run in 64-bit mode as opposed to SDR which runs at 128-bit mode. Runs at 175mhz core / 166mhz memory and does not require a fan on the heatsink.
GeForce2 GTS (DDR) - Runs at 200mhz core / 166mhz memory.
GeForce2 Pro (DDR) - The same as a GeForce2 GTS, except it runs at 200mhz core / 200mhz memory.
GeForce2 Ultra (DDR) - The same as a GeForce2 GTS, except it runs at 250mhz core / 230mhz memory.
GeForce3 - Runs at 200mhz core / 230mhz memory.

The GeForce2 series uses a 0.18 micron manufacturing process instead of the 0.22 micron used in the previous process, meaning less power consumption and heat production. All cards in the series have a second generation T&L engine, can render two textures per pixel instead of just one, have the NSR (NVIDIA Shading Rasterizer) and an HDVP (High Definition Video Processor) for better DVD and HDTV support.

The GeForce2 MX supports 2 monitor outputs for TwinView (two video outputs to two monitors, or one monitor and a flat screen display or TV) on the same card) and Digital Vibrance Control. It has only 2 texture pipelines instead of 4 on the GeForce or GeForce2 GTS, and a less advanced HDVP without support for some high-end modes.

The GeForce3 uses 0.15 micron manufacturing process. It is a new generation of chip, much faster than the GeForce2, fully DirectX 8.0 compliant, has the nfiniteFX Engine engine, providing support for vertex and pixel shaders, Lightspeed Memory Architecture for improved memory bandwidth, and High-Resolution Antialiasing (HRAA) support for faster antialiasing support in the form of Quincunx antialiasing. It also supports Digital Vibrance Control.

as quoted from geforcefaq

From my opinion, offcourse there's a big difference from GF2 and the MX version. From anything. Memory clock, Core Clock, RAM type used, Bandwith, etc...etc...

The weakness probably on memory type. Basically DDR based board has much more bandwith than the SDR based ones. I mean you can run 2000< games on 1024x768x32 fine on SDR. But on 2001> games, you will notice BIGG difference when you are comparing those games on SDR and DDR based boards.

The strength is with cheaper money, you can get the GF2 - cutted technology - chipset and the most powerful card on its class (yeah right, until KYRO 2 comes and ruin the fun )

As always, there are choices if you wish to upgrade or something;
ATI Radeon series, KYRO 2 (this boy beats GF2MX easily), and if you're a CAD user, Quadro series is a better choice, or Voodoo 5 5500 for glide fanatics?

 

[Satan]

Originally posted by 404
As always, there are choices if you wish to upgrade or something;
ATI Radeon series, KYRO 2 (this boy beats GF2MX easily), and if you're a CAD user, Quadro series is a better choice, or Voodoo 5 5500 for glide fanatics?

Avoid the Kyro like the plague. It doesn't have T&L, which is a must for today's games. Sure, it outperforms a GeForce2 MX in older games (like Unreal Tournament, Quake III, etc...), but if you want a card that will be able to play today's games (which run like crap on any non-T&L card), stick with the GeForce2 MX.

 

[Adair]

I'm not sure when its coming out, but the Kyro III will have hardware T&L and I think the core and mem speeds will be equivalent to a GF2mx

 

[404]

OK, so KYRO 2 doesnt have TnL - most gamers today wont even notice the difference - since most games havent take this advantage to the edge.

BUT GeForce series dont have Environtment BUMP Mapping - which is so important and it is born before nvidia even implemented it on any of Geforce series

Environment BUMP Mapping = Matrox G400 (pioneer and the best there is), KYRO 1 and 2 - upcoming KYRO 3, and Geforce 3 cmon, Nvidia!:eyes: - Radeon if im not mistaken

TnL is Good, but bump Mapping is way more beautiful - and most gamers can spot the difference easily - and this lack of feature that causes GF series sucked tha 3dMark Bump Mapping tests

TnL + Bump Mapping+HRAA = now thats what I call a SuperFusion!

 

[Slaimus]

getting a GF2MX will likely not affect your FF9 speed at all.
All current video plugins are only single texturing and don't use any T&L. The GF2MX wastes 2 texels per cycle as a result.

Emulation depends on CPU a whole lot more than video. My old TNT(1) will does the job fine at 800x600 on a fast CPU.

 

[mecharmor23]

You mean that a better video card won't increase the speed of FF9 because of the way the emulator is designed and how it uses the video card?? So if I want a good boost in speed and smoothness in framerates the best thing to do is upgrading the cpu and some DDR ram correct?

 

[404]

Originally posted by mecharmor23
You mean that a better video card won't increase the speed of FF9 because of the way the emulator is designed and how it uses the video card??

Better Card WILL increase the speed of anything that uses its capability. You can't say that a TNT2 Vanta and TNT2 Ultra don't have any difference....

Originally posted by mecharmor23
So if I want a good boost in speed and smoothness in framerates the best thing to do is upgrading the cpu and some DDR ram correct?

That is one way. Upgrading your CPU and VGA card to something that is DDR, is a good way to increase your gaming fun. Although there are other ways, overclocking for example - But dont be fooled with GF2MX DDR - they're basically the same with GF2MX SDR. So No use

Try to look for ATI Radeon DDR, Voodoo 4/5 DDR, Geforce 2 GTS/Ultra/Pro DDR - if you're looking for DDR ones.
But GF2MX is powerful enough for the moment (value segment)

 

[SanDRocK]

I gotta Asus gforce2 MX card and its a sweet card i get constant 60FPS in pritty much all my games

the only draw back of this card is that it lacks in 3D resolutions above 1024x768 even at 1024x768 its just barely gettin 60fps

 

[liquid]

Geforce 2Mx comes in 2 vararients

DDR Memory on a 64bit bus
or
SDR Memory on a 128bit bus

along with reducing the reduction from 4 pixel per-clock cycle to 2 per-cycle. Greatly reduces the rendering capabilities of this card.

In real-world gamming applications you'll probably notice very little difference why playing a game on the Geforce 2MX to it's brother's the GTS,Pro,and Ultra. However, the difference comes when you start enabling effects such as FSAA (especially at resolutions greater than 800x600)

Furthermore, at 800Mhz you are underpowered to see any difference between an MX and a GTS. To truely see the power of the GTS you'll need at least a 1Ghz processor or faster.

hope this helps

-MX maxes out it's capabilites around 866Mhz btw.

 

[Zoomy222]

Seriously, Kyro II is the way to go. It doesn't have hardware TnL, but ti does have VERY good software TnL. So good that you would think it's hardware. And to whoever said TnL isn't used that much you are 100% correct. MDK2 and Giants are the only games I'm aware of that use it where you can really see it. But the Kyro II can easily handle it. For price verse performance Kyro II smokes them all. It keeps up with the GF2 Ultra with FSAA, which to me is really important. (by keeps up I mean better or the same, which it is).